In fact, I'd go even further and say that Plasma Netbook has features that standard KDE might benefit from adopting. For one thing, the activity bar makes activities accessible in a way that squirreling them away in the desktop toolkit does not. As things are, in my experience many users tend to overlook them, which needlessly limits their workflow.
For another, some users might appreciate the menu bar as a friendlier alternative than the available menus or KRunner. The menu bar does take up screen real estate, but making it a floating palette that can be dragged out of the way would largely solve that problem.
However, at the other extreme, Plasma Netbook's design does not always take into account the size of the screens it will often be running on. Even on a widescreen notebook, some of the icons in the panel seem too small, which makes me wonder whether the design has been done on workstation monitor. The half size Lock and Leave icons especially threaten to be illegible, and, to some eyes, probably would be.
Similarly, the default size of widgets when they are added to a desktop is enormous -- at least four times the size you would expect from using standard KDE. On a netbook screen of 10 inches or less, three or four would fill the entire desktop.
Another size problem is the dimensions of newly opened windows. The windows for some applications, like the OpenOffice.org apps, sensibly open full-screen, which seems a reasonable setting for a netbook. Other applications, though, seem to open at no standard size, with some too small for any use and others larger than necessary. I suspect I would not be the only user who would like to exercise some control over default window sizes on an individual basis.
For that matter, more customization would be desirable throughout. In both containments, customization options are limited. In Applications, you can select System -> System Settings to access all the options you expect in KDE, and in both computer containments you can click the desktop toolkit to add widgets to the desktop. You can also set keyboard shortcuts for each containment, and add and configure widgets. If you want, you can even add the Kickoff, Classic, or Lancelot menus to the desktop to run Plasma Netbook more like standard KDE.
Currently, however, you cannot edit the panel, increase its size or change its position. Nor can you add widgets to the panel. You can add a folder view to a containment or revert to a standard KDE desktop, but in either case you cannot integrate a folder view with the desktop, as you can in standard KDE.
However, why these customization features are missing is uncertain. On the one hand, they could be left out deliberately, on the grounds that netbooks require a simpler interface. On the other hand, the developers of the Plasma Netbook may simply have not gotten around to implementing them yet.
Either way, their lack requires some getting used to. Each time I missed some customization feature, I had to keep telling myself to lower my expectations, at least temporarily.
Like KDE in general, the strength of Plasma Netbook is the way that it stretches the metaphor of the desktop without actually breaking it. Whether the desktop is the most efficient metaphor available for general computing is open to debate -- but, for better or worse, its the one that has become standard. The KDE 4.x series succeeds to the extent that it recognizes this restraint, and I suspect that the same will be true for Plasma Netbook.
What is not clear yet is how much Plasma Netbook's designers are aware of other restraints -- in particular a netbook's limited screen sizes and the expectation that users have of changing settings to suit themselves.
Plasma Netbook's basic design seems sound enough. Yet, in the end, its reception will probably depend on how carefully these limitations are taken into account. If they are ignored in the final release, then Plasma Netbook will likely be a mediocrity, if not a failure.
By contrast, if these limitations are given just a little more thought, then Plasma Netbook just might be a winner. But for now, we'll have to wait to see which it becomes.
ALSO SEE: 49 Hot New Open Source Applications
One of the ways around the issues of security and control that make some businesses wary of cloud computing is to build a private cloud -- one that remains within the corporate firewall and is wholly controlled internally. Private clouds also increase the agility of IT an organization's IT infrastructure and make it easier to roll out new technology projects. Download this eBook to get the facts behind the private cloud and learn how your organization can get started.